A further test of General Relativity can be conducted by comparing clocks that are ONLY experiencing a change in gravity.

So far precision testing of GR with clocks has been conducted concerning change in height in the gravity potential, where the clock is, in addition to a change in gravity, also experiencing a change in centripetal speed and centrifugal force.

And precision testing of GR has also been conducted concerning a change in relative motion, where the clock is not experiencing a change in gravity.

In Febuary this year portable precision clocks were tested for the first time.

It is my suggestion that these portable clocks should be placed in circumstance where ONLY a change of gravity is occurring, in order to confirm that General Relativity is indeed correct in assuming that an increase in gravity slows time down.

This could be conducted by placing a clock at 2 different locations at same longitude, and at same height above sea level, where there is known density difference in the geology of the locations, and thus compare how they tick.This will constitute only a difference in gravity

Or - much more simply, just place a clock at one of the gravity wave experiments and record how the clock ticks differently when a gravity wave hits, as compared to how it ticks normally.This will also constitute only a change in gravity.

General Relativity predicts that a clock that experiences only a change (increase) in gravity will tick slower.

My modification of General Relativity predicts that a clock that experiences only a change (increase) in gravity will tick faster.*

That's an interesting assertion.I'm fairly sure that the ensemble of clocks round the world already have to take local gravity into account.I think the UK's are in Teddington which is near sea level. I believe that some of the best in the US are in Boulder Colorado which is at serious altitude.In any event, there's no way they are all experiencing the same gravitational field.If the"correction" for local g didn't work, they would know.

@timeyThis seems a reasonable way to leave it at the moment. If the tests verify your prediction we can revisit your paper.We would have to look carefully at the Shapiro delay because I did some back of packet calcs and they donít give the results you were looking for.

Logged

and the misguided shall lead the gullible, the feebleminded have inherited the earth.

A further test of General Relativity can be conducted by comparing clocks that are ONLY experiencing a change in gravity.

So far precision testing of GR with clocks has been conducted concerning change in height in the gravity potential, where the clock is, in addition to a change in gravity, also experiencing a change in centripetal speed and centrifugal force.

And precision testing of GR has also been conducted concerning a change in relative motion, where the clock is not experiencing a change in gravity.

In Febuary this year portable precision clocks were tested for the first time.

It is my suggestion that these portable clocks should be placed in circumstance where ONLY a change of gravity is occurring, in order to confirm that General Relativity is indeed correct in assuming that an increase in gravity slows time down.

This could be conducted by placing a clock at 2 different locations at same longitude, and at same height above sea level, where there is known density difference in the geology of the locations, and thus compare how they tick.This will constitute only a difference in gravity

Or - much more simply, just place a clock at one of the gravity wave experiments and record how the clock ticks differently when a gravity wave hits, as compared to how it ticks normally.This will also constitute only a change in gravity.

General Relativity predicts that a clock that experiences only a change (increase) in gravity will tick slower.

My modification of General Relativity predicts that a clock that experiences only a change (increase) in gravity will tick faster.*